Why only the famous

I have just seen on the news that gordon ramsey is to receive an award for raising money wen he ran the marathon. Whilst I admit that it very commendable that he made the time and effort, so did 35 thousand other people and I bet he didnt go round with a piece of paper writing down friends names and how much they would donate. I also read that he jogs to work and his wife follows in the car with his work clothes, so how environmentally friendly is that. Dont get me wrong i'm sure he is a good cook and all that , but isn't he more famous for humiliating mere mortals who cant cook as well as he thinks he can and is it really wise to scream at someone who is standing very close to sharp kitchen utensils? I'm not a Gordon Ramsey fan but iMm not just having a go at him but at all the other 'famous' people who do a bit of charity work and then receive awards for it. My gripe is that hundreds of thousands of 'ordinary' people raise money for all sorts of good causes without reward and they do it willing and in many cases at a cost to themselves. Where are the accolades for them? I just think that being famous is reward in itself and blabbing on about all the charity they do is a bit too much to bear, if they want to help then give up some of that wealth they seem so keen on accumulating or in Gordon Ramseys case lower your prices so we can all afford to eat there or if you want to really be charitable open some soup kitchens for those less fortunate then the rest of us.